Yesterday, after speaking with some friends about 8a.nu / Grading / Points and how this data might be biased because of ranking objectives, I came up with an idea to create an incentive for climbers to be more honest about how they grade routes in the 8a.nu.
Imagine a route with 10 ascents. 3 climbers grade it as an 8a and 7 grade it as a 7c+.
Now, the result would be that each of those 3 climbers would be given a score of 1000 points and the other group would have 950 points. In this way, if one cares anything about the ranking, you are given an incentive to upgrade routes!
(Many of us think 8a.nu has an upgrading bias because of the current points system!)
But what about giving each an average point score like this: (1000 * 3 + 950 * 7) / 10 !?
(Every time someone would do this route the score would be updated accordingly)
In this way, everyone who does the same route would be given the same score regardless of being an upgrader or a downgrader and, moreover, this incentive towards honesty would improve the rating quality of 8a.nu database!
I can anticipate one problem with this system. It relates to the routes that have and intermediate (and easier) top. As I see it, the solution could be to have their name written differently (like: “????? L1”)
What’s your opinion?